Back in the earlier days of cinema one of the most notable
aspects of the business was censorship that in America was upheld by deeply
Christian groups. So as a result one could make an incredibly horrifying film
with two resources, themes that went against Christian values, and implied imagery.
By doing these two things it was virtually guaranteed that you would frighten
the censors who are paid to analyse every detail and decipher every suggested
frame of your movie. ‘Nosferatu’ of 1922 was a German expressionist film a
genre that lived off implying its themes through imagery. By directly defying
so many of the values of the censorship boards the film earned itself a condemnation,
the movie itself became more frightening than anything it was depicting. It did
not matter how frightening it actually was, as long as everyone was telling you
it was scary, you would be wary of said film.History lesson (don’t worry I’ll hold your hand through it, actually that sounds worryingly creepy). In the 1950s World War 2 was over, but for most American people there was another fear within society. It was communism. Whether this fear was justified or not, government heavyweights like Joseph McCarthy worked to fuel those fears and emphasised the identification and subversion through what was later called The Red Scare. Movie time now, as ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ stuck to the popular genre of the time with science fiction. The plot involves a man who is horrified to discover that people in his town have been replaced with alien duplicates known as pod-people. His delirious ramblings attract attention from the townspeople and soon he is unsure who is real and who is a duplicate.
So who represents who? Well pod-people are the communists in this scenario (obviously this is relative to how the public perceived them at the time), a festering race of aliens that will absorb you into their society, and you in turn will do the same to everyone you know and will spread across the world. But in that respect, does the man who discovers them represent McCarthy, deliriously running around, accusing his neighbours and friends of being traitors? Did ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ even intentionally use this fear of communism, or was it just a coincidence that one can only see in retrospect. As well as that of course the film could be an allegory that criticises The Red Scare or justifies it.
Danger in disguise was the main message of horror now, and no one epitomised that better than a young man known as Norman Bates. You know the story of Psycho, so let’s go straight into analysis. Following two world wars on an industrial scale many people were now witnessing first hand psychological damage, but though it was becoming a more accepted ailment, the average person still had little understanding of it and usually found the notion of one person undergoing a complete personality change rather frightening. These murders are unmotivated and committed with a sudden and violent rage that basically said to people that anyone can kill you at any time.
By 1968 the Civil Rights movement was still taking place, and arguments about racial equality and desegregation were raging perhaps more than ever. But when a zombie invasion takes place (I am talking about films now, you did not miss a page of your history textbook about zombies) the few survivors must band together regardless of racial prejudice because they are all that is left of humanity. ‘Night of the Living Dead’ definitely had a lot to say about how humans can be more destructive to themselves than any of the undead, with just a few handfuls of people left abrasive personalities turn on each other. The whole point is only further emphasised by the films ending, spoiler ahead. Our black protagonist Sam is shot by another survivor (either mistaking him for a zombie or in a more sinister interpretation, seeing it as a chance to kill Sam out of racial hatred), unless we put these prejudices aside we will ultimately destroy ourselves. Then there is the fact that the zombies arise from a nuclear fallout, where did that idea come from I wonder?
A lot of bad stuff had gone down in the 1960s, to such an
extent that by 1973 many people were stating that the classic American dream
and its ideologies was dead. Households were no longer whole, religion was a
source of conflict not unity and even children were left exposed to the evils
of the world. Did I hear ‘the power of Christ compels you’? Yes The Exorcist,
the one and only. For all the reasons I just listed this satanic horror had a
profound impact on so many moviegoers. Parental negligence and a broken home
was why Linda Blair was left vulnerable to being possessed by Satan and as a
key part of religious teachings, the idea that religion brought so much fear
and pain to a home only further damaged that notion of the death of classic
America. And the subject of that possession is a little girl. How much more
cynical can the outlook get? Well the fact that other religious horrors about
family like ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ and ‘The Omen’ came out just hammered that point
in further.The evil of ‘The Exorcist’ also penetrates homes, leaving no safe haven. What else did that in the 1970s? Of course, Mr Michael Myers. By 1978 there was a growing fear that nowhere was safe, the Zodiac Killer brought on a serial killer craze and even the President was capable of scandal and conspiracy (the remake of ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ served as a metaphor for closed door conspiracies). But aside from that, John Carpenter’s ‘Halloween’ popularised the slasher genre as a perfect metaphor for both of those. An unstoppable and unmotivated killer slashes through victims, invading their homes at random selection (sounds familiar to ‘Psycho’, well wrap your head around the fact that ‘Halloween’s’ star Jamie Lee Curtis is the daughter of Janet Leigh, star of ‘Psycho’, that cannot be an accident).
Finally, has any horror film provoked as much analysis and
deliberation as ‘The Shining’. Initially the film was received harshly (even
nominated for a few Razzie Awards) but over time gained a huge following and
acclaim. Why? Well I would be one of many to try and decipher what this film
means (there is even a movie called ‘Room 237’ specifically devoted to finding
out what it means). Maybe, just maybe that is the most frightening thing about ‘The
Shining’. As society became more concerned with what it knew and the
information age took over, to be presented with something that had so many
deeper meanings and possible interpretations is almost unnerving, and if the blood filled elevator, slaughtered twins, carpet patterns, locked vault doors and eerie photographs from 1921 all actually mean one conclusive thing, I shudder to think of what hellish nightmare it could be. Even though I
think Stanley Kubrick may the most unique and ingenious directorial mind of all
time I admit it would be a stretch to say that he predicted the rise of the
internet. But I think he understood that sometimes allowing things to fester
within people’s minds generates more terror than anything you can show them. If
you ask them to draw a conclusion for themselves it can serve as a metaphor for
their own personal fears, regardless of the context in society or culture that
they first see his movie. Kubrick did the same thing for science fiction with ‘2001:
A Space Odyssey’, he did it with crime in ‘A Clockwork Orange’ and he did the
same thing for horror with ‘The Shining’, perhaps that makes it the most
timeless horror film of all time.So those are my ramblings on horror movies but I would love to hear yours. Feel free to leave a comment below, thanks and bye.
No comments:
Post a Comment